Recovery of Bullet Fired from Accused’s Weapon Crucial: PH High Court Reaffirms Conviction in Murder Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court upholds life imprisonment of Wazir Singh for murder under Section 302 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act. In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the conviction of Wazir Singh for the murder of Manoj Malik, dismissing the appeal against the trial court’s decision. The division bench, comprising Justices Gurvinder Singh Gill and N.S. Shekhawat, emphasized the pivotal role of ballistic evidence in affirming the conviction, highlighting the linkage between the bullet recovered from the crime scene and the weapon seized from the accused.

The case pertains to the murder of Manoj Malik on July 7, 2000. According to the FIR lodged by Harjinder Singh, Manoj Malik was shot dead outside his shop in Gurgaon by two unidentified men, who later fled the scene on a motorcycle. The investigation revealed that the murder was allegedly orchestrated by Vijay Singh @ Boda and others to eliminate witnesses in an earlier murder case involving Malik’s brother.

Wazir Singh was apprehended on August 21, 2000, along with Kulbir Singh. Upon arrest, a .38 bore revolver loaded with six cartridges was recovered from Wazir Singh, and a ballistic expert later confirmed that the bullet recovered from the crime scene had been fired from this revolver.

The court placed significant reliance on the ballistic evidence presented. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill noted, “The scientific evidence clearly establishes that the bullet recovered from the scene was fired from the .38 revolver seized from the accused, Wazir Singh.” This ballistic report was deemed crucial in affirming the connection between the accused and the crime, especially in light of the retraction of statements by key eyewitnesses.

Despite the initial testimonies from the complainant Harjinder Singh and eyewitness Bishan Singh, both witnesses turned hostile during the trial, failing to identify the accused. The court observed that the hostile witnesses did not invalidate the prosecution’s case given the corroborative forensic evidence. The judgment emphasized, “Witnesses turning hostile under duress is a common occurrence; however, it does not diminish the value of reliable scientific evidence.”

The court reiterated the principles of circumstantial evidence, underscoring that a conviction can be sustained if the chain of circumstantial evidence is complete. The bench stated, “The ballistic report linking the recovered bullet to the accused’s revolver is a critical piece of evidence that conclusively proves the involvement of the accused in the crime.”

Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill remarked, “The refusal of the accused to participate in the test identification parade further strengthens the prosecution’s case, corroborated by the conclusive ballistic report.” The judgment also highlighted, “The antecedents of the accused, coupled with the motive and scientific evidence, leave no room for doubt regarding his guilt.”

The High Court’s decision to uphold the conviction of Wazir Singh underscores the judiciary’s reliance on forensic evidence in cases where eyewitness testimonies falter. The affirmation of the lower court’s findings sends a robust message about the importance of scientific evidence in criminal trials. This judgment is anticipated to reinforce the legal framework for handling cases involving witness intimidation and the pivotal role of forensic science in ensuring justice.

Date of Decision: July 9, 2024